Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Failing to meet sense-perception cross-check criteria is ... — Carmelics
    Home/Religious Experience
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→If God-sightings lack confirming empirical evidence, they remain unjustified — but the reason is the absence of confirming evidence, not the absence of sense-perception-style cross-checks.

    Failing to meet sense-perception cross-check criteria is not itself the ground for epistemic rejection.

    Religious ExperienceTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Religious ExperienceTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    If God-sightings lack confirming empirical evidence, they remain unjustified — b...Justification of God-sightings depends on whether confirming experiential eviden...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Religious Experience
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Disanalogists take sense-perception as the paradigmatic standard for a...78%Answering the skeptic about epistemic justification requires that the ...77%Accepting or rejecting a hypothesis requires judging which consequence...76%[P1] states a necessary condition for the justified acceptance of any ...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mysticism
    View source passageHide passage
    Regarding the bearing of the alleged disanalogies on the Argument from Experience, the disanalogists take the evidential credentials of sense-perception as paradigmatic for epistemology. They equate confirming and disconfirming evidence only when evidence strongly analogous to the kind for sensory perception is available. However, the evidential requirement should be only “confirming experiential evidence,” be what it may. If God-sightings have confirming evidence, even if different from the kin

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective